Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T19:23:47.516Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Citric acid and fumaric acid as food additives for early-weaned piglets

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

R. W. Henry ,
D. W. Pickard  and
P. E. Hughes
R. W. Henry
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Physiology and Nutrition, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT
D. W. Pickard
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Physiology and Nutrition, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT
P. E. Hughes
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Physiology and Nutrition, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT
Get access

Abstract

The effects of diet acidification on the growth performance of piglets were assessed in two experiments. In the first, 167 piglets were weaned at 10 days of age and penned in litter-mate groups (seven groups per treatment) which were allocated to one of three diets, with either citric acid (30 g/kg; C), fumaric acid (15 g/kg; F) or no additional organic acid (N); pigs were fed ad libitum for 25 days. The rate of live-weight gain was significantly higher for treatment C than for treatments F or N (216 (s.e. 10), 170 (s.e. 7) and 189 (s.e. 6) g/day respectively; P < 0·05). The voluntary food intake on treatment C also tended to be higher than on the other two diets (220 (s.e. 24), 182 (s.e. 18) and 189 (s.e. 7) g/day for treatments C, F and N respectively).

In experiment 2, 30 crossbred piglets were penned in single-sex groups of three and weaned at 10 days of age. The same diets were used as in experiment 1 but all three diets were available ad libitum to each group of piglets for 25 days. When dietary choice was allowed, piglets consumed significantly greater quantities of the control diet than of the acidified diets (1381, 1422, 2972 (s.e. 132) g/day for diets C, F and N respectively; P < 0·01). When the relative intake of each diet was correlated with live-weight gain, only diet C showed a significant positive correlation (r = +0·74; P < 0·05). Correlations of F and N intakes with live-weight gain were negative. It is concluded that citric acid (30 g/kg) in the diet of early-weaned piglets promotes live-weight gain, although acidification of the diet may decrease palatability.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 40 , Issue 3 , June 1985 , pp. 505 - 509
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1985

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Barrow, P. A., Brooker, B. E., Fuller, R., Newport, M. J., Sojka, W. J., Wray, C. and Woode, G. N. 1979. The aetiology of diarrhoea in pigs weaned at two days of age. Res. vet. Sci. 27: 52–58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bellis, D. B. 1973. Modern developments in early weaning of pigs. S. Afr. J. Anim. Sci. 3: 173–176.Google Scholar
Brune, H. and Pallauf, J. 1979. [Metabolic and feeding experiments with livestock.] Ruhrstickstoff (ed. Bochun, A. G.), pp. 20–28. Fumarsaure in der Tierernahrung. Parey, Hamburg.Google Scholar
Cole, D. J. A., Beal, R. M. and Luscombe, J. R. 1968. The effect on performance and bacterial flora of lactic acid, propionic acid, calcium propionate and calcium acrylate in the drinking water of weaned pigs. Vet. Rec. 83: 459–464.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Čupka, B. and Košalko, S. 1975. [Effect of citric acid i n the feed on fattening and carcass value of pigs.] Pol'nohospodàrstvo 21: 983–991.Google Scholar
Falkowski, J. F. and Aherne, F. X. 1984. Fumaric and citric acid as feed additives in starter pig nutrition. J. Anim. Sci. 58: 935–938.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glastonbry, J. R. W. 1977. Why piglets die before weaning. Agric. Gaz. N.S.W. 88:(2), 34–35.Google Scholar
Hoppenbrock, K. H. 1979. [Experiences with fumaric acid for piglets reared in cages.] Ruhrstickstoff (ed. Bochum, A. G.), pp. 29–32. Fumarsaure in der Tierernahrung. Parey, Hamburg.Google Scholar
Kirchgessner, M. and Roth, F. X. 1976. [The use of fumaric acid in rearing piglets.] Züchtungskunde 48: 402–406.Google Scholar
Kirchgessner, M. and Roth, F. X. 1978. [Fumaric acid as a feed additive for piglets and growing pigs.] Züchtungskunde 50: 17–24.Google Scholar
Kirchgessner, M. and Roth, F. X. 1980. [Digestibility and balance of protein and energy and some minerals ni diets for piglets supplemented with fumaric acid.] Z. Tierphysiol. Tierernähr. Futtermittelk. 44: 239–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirchgessner, M. and Roth, F. X. 1982. Fumaric acid as a feed additive in pig nutrition. Pig News Inf. 3: 259–263.Google Scholar
Kirchgessner, M. and Roth-maier, D. A. 1975. [The addition of citric acid to piglet rations.] Züchtungskunde 47: 329–335.Google Scholar
Manners, M. J. 1976. The development of gastric function in the pig. Proc. Nutr. Soc. 35: 49–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pallauf, J., Brune, H. and Gothert, W. 1980. The effect of fumaric acid and citric acid as feed additives on early weaned piglets. Proc. A. Meet. Eur. Ass. Anim. Prod., Pap. No. 66 (Abstr.)Google Scholar
Pavlìk, J. 1977. [Citric acid for fattening pigs.] Krmivàřstvì 13: 5 (Abstr.).Google Scholar
Scipioni, R., Zaghini, G. and Biavati, A. 1978. [Acidified diets in early weaned piglets.] Zootec. Nutr. Anim. 4: 201–218.Google Scholar
Smith, H. and Lucas, I. A. M. 1957. The early weaning of pigs. HI. The influence of protein supply during two stages of growth on the performance of pigs from 9 lb to bacon weight. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 49: 409–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomlinson, J. R. and Lawrence, T. L. J. 1981. Dietary manipulation of gastric pH in the prophylaxis of enteric disease in weaned pigs: some field observations. Vet. Rec. 109: 120–122.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vuyst, A. de, Moreels, A., Arnould, R. and Romedenne, J. J. 1974. [The value of citric acid in feeds for fattening pigs. 2.] Revue Agric. 27: 599–606.Google Scholar
Zednik, N. 1979. [Effect of citric acid in fattening pigs.] Biol. Chem. Živočišnè Vyroby-Vet. 15: 327–334.Google Scholar